Global Warming is a Scam

[Loudmouth]

In science, theories are not true by concept alone but must be verifiable.

The same goes for those who hypothesized that increased CO2 in earth's atmosphere will bring about an increase in earths global temperature.

Lo and behold, temperature has increased. Theory verified.

 

[eclipsenow]

In science, theories are not true by concept alone but must be verifiable.

The same goes for those who hypothesized that increased CO2 in earth's atmosphere will bring about an increase in earths global temperature.

Predictions are a key component to verifying if a scientific theory seems fundamentally correct.

However, with the CO2 induced global warming theory the numerious literature recorded predictions have all failed.

There is now a website to bring attention to these failed predictions made by many CAGW proponents, as listed below.


Failed climate predictions gets a website | Watts Up With That?

Watt's up with that has a graph that purports to show some discrepancy? I'm shocked!

 

[RealityCheck01]

.

Twisting science to project that the earth is now Catastrophically warming due to CO2 is Alarmism.

.

Sorry, Heissonear, but fact less stuff about seemingly imaginary statements does not impress anyone.

There has been no "twisting of science". Scientific models of climate change show that it is probable that given no change in CO2 emissions than there will be changes that anyone would agree would be Catastrophic. Rises in sea level that submerge entire nations is not trivial even if those nations are small Pacific islands . That those same rises in sea level will displace millions of people and cost billions of dollars is Catastrophic.

Positives and negatives of global warming

The consequences of climate change become increasingly bad after each additional degree of warming, with the consequences of 2°C being quite damaging and the consequences of 4°C being potentially catastrophic.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Let's save civilisation from something that has not been observed.

Let us save the readers of this thread from statements of ignorance, Heissonear - the effects of global warming have been observed.

Evidence for global warming

There are many lines of independent empirical evidence for global warming, from accelerated ice loss from the Arctic to Antarctica to the poleward migration of plant and animal species across the globe.

 

[RealityCheck01]

You do not need to look far for examples of those who are deviously promoting CAGW.

Wrong, Heissonear, you do not have to look far for examples of people who are ignorant about science !

This is an example of Heissonear indirectly citing an article by an ignorant reporter (Christopher Booker) parroting the ignorance of a blogger.

The shear idiocy of thinking that scientists should always use raw data is obvious. Scientists need to process data to remove extraneous influences. A simple example is adjusting for background radiation in nuclear experiments.

Good debunk by Phil Plait: No, Adjusting Temperature Measurements Is Not a Scandal

This is nonsense. The claim is wrong. The scientists didn’t manipulate the data, they processed it. That’s a very different thing. And the reason they do it isn’t hard to understand.

Imagine you want to measure the daily temperature in a field near a town. You want to make sure the measurements you get aren’t affected by whether it’s cloudy or sunny—direct sunlight on the thermometer will increase the temperature you measure—so you set it up in a reflective box. Look: Right away you’ve adjusted the temperature, even before you’ve taken a measurement! You’ve made sure an outside influence doesn’t affect your data adversely. That’s a good thing.

.

 

[RealityCheck01]

In science, theories are not true by concept alone but must be verifiable.

Climate science is science and so there are testable, falsifiable predictions. The simplest is that an increase in CO2 will cause global warming. We have measured
1. An increase in CO2.
2. Global warming.
This verifies climate science in an easily understood manner, Heissonear !.


Citing a climate change denying web site linking to a really bad web site is not good, Heissonear. That web site includes "predictions" from politicians, speeches, newspaper articles, interviews, books .
In fact what I have looked at included absolutely no references to the scientific literature!

If you bothered to look through the scientific literature, Heissonear, rather than rely on rather ignorant web sites such as WUWT then you would find some instances of scientific predictions about climate that were actually wrong. You would also find many predictions that are correct. That is how the process of science works - people make predictions and other people test them and find out whether they are correct or not. Incorrect predictions are actually good since they give insights into how models can go wrong, what is missing in them and how to fix the models.



.

 

[Heissonear]

Let us save the readers of this thread from statements of ignorance, Heissonear - the effects of global warming have been observed.

Evidence for global warming

.

You wish such was real evidence for AGW!

Try again!

Global Warming by additional CO2 in the atmosphere is, well, Global Warming! You know, like the Global Climate Models predicted!!

The cycles of warming and cooling over the past 3000 years, even as recorded by civilizations, shows how natural climate variables control earth's temperature swings.

You seem to have forgotten how nature controls the swings in earths surface temperatures.

Since the Little Ice Age cool period we have been in naturally induced "Modern Warm Period". Enjoy it!

No observation of CO2 "heating the planet" exists. None. All of the natural variables still shows nature is in control.

You need to first identify and then Subtract out the natural variations and factors before knowing if CO2 is the cause for any increase in earth's temperature, not for +80% of all increase in earths temperature propaganda.

The earth has not increased temperature un-naturally!!

Any more increase in earths temperature does not mean CAGW! Get over such inaccurate promotion and propaganda.

.

 

[Loudmouth]

The cycles of warming and cooling over the past 3000 years, even as recorded by civilizations, shows how natural climate variables control earth's temperature swings.

Showing that 1,000 people died of natural causes does not mean that people can only die of natural causes. Showing a person who dies of a natural heart attack does not refute the possibility that someone can artificially end some other person's life.

Just because past cycles were caused by the Milankovitch cycles does not mean that temperature can not increase with additional CO2 in the atmosphere.

You seem to have forgotten how nature controls the swings in earths surface temperatures.

You seemed to have forgotten that no previous natural cycle included the burning of gigatons of fossils fuels over a timespan of a century.

You have also forgotten what the greenhouse effect is.

 

[RealityCheck01]

.

You wish such was real evidence for AGW!

.

I do not wish it - it is a physical fact that there is empirical evidence for AGW. It is a physical fact that in the real world more than 95% of climate scientists say that the evidence is that AGW is happening.

The ignorance behind climate is only controlled by "natural climate variables" should be obvious to you Heissonear. The CO2 we add to the atmosphere is as natural as any other CO2 !

Global Warming by additional CO2 in the atmosphere is actually Global Warming ! You know like the Global Climate Models have predicted.

What makes it AGW is the observed global warming (that is the GW part Heissonear) can only be explained by human activities (that is the A part Heissonear).

What makes it clear that you need to learn about climate science is your idea that climate scientists do not know about "natural variations and factors", Heissonear .
Climate scientists know about and study
* The Sun (a huge natural factor)
* El Niño
* La Niña
* Volcanoes
* CO2 produced by plants, etc.
* CO2 produced by humans.
* lots more.


Skeptical Science is a good place to start your education.

 

[eclipsenow]

The embodiment and works of the IPCC as the most clear example of the "Catastrophic Global Warming" scam!

The Globe Is Not Warming scamsters at Watt's Up With That are providing a paranoid conspiracy theory for weak-minded people frightened by reality. It is the frightened that flock to Heartland Institute conferences and websites, the frightened that shout "Nothing to see here!" in echo chambers every time a new scientific data set confirms the world is warming, Spring arrives earlier, winter later, and gradually the glaciers and polar ice retreats. It is the frightened who come onto websites like this and become stubborn internet trolls unwilling to listen to reality. It's just sad, especially when those people deceiving themselves claim the name of Christ. It's not a good look!

 

[Heissonear]

The Globe Is Not Warming scamsters at Watt's Up With That are providing a paranoid conspiracy theory for weak-minded people frightened by reality. It is the frightened that flock to Heartland Institute conferences and websites, the frightened that shout "Nothing to see here!" in echo chambers every time a new scientific data set confirms the world is warming, Spring arrives earlier, winter later, and gradually the glaciers and polar ice retreats. It is the frightened who come onto websites like this and become stubborn internet trolls unwilling to listen to reality. It's just sad, especially when those people deceiving themselves claim the name of Christ. It's not a good look!

.

Mixture, again.

When are you going to stop following what men say and make intelligent observations of the natural world yourself?

Observing the natural world is how I grew up, and relates to the college degree I have and occupational work I perform for the past 34 years.

Natural variability still controls the earths climate and weather. You should learn from nature, not just from men. You should observe nature, learn by observing nature, and over time learn about weather and climate dynamics. Not headlines and men's words.

It should stay in focus that the recently created "Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming" statements and predictions should all be, well, the Catastrophic Warming of the entire earth by man. Not about misinformation and hype.

When you look at nature and its systems of cooling, warming, physical display of conduction-convection-massive atmospheric and ocean currents-and the like, the additional ~150 ppm CO2 placed in the atmosphere by man has no noticeable effect on the earth TEMPERATURE. In particular CATASTROPHIC WARMING!!!

It ain't happening. Put the propaganda down. Stop the hype like it is happening. Look around for yourself.


.

 

[hurste1951]

.
When are you going to stop following what men say and make intelligent observations of the natural world yourself?

What right do you have to demand others do which you clearly don't do yourself???

You quote standard denialist blogs so you are following "what men say". And when it is shown (time and again) that you really don't understand the details of the science as it is currently pursued you make it even LESS about actual observation and even MORE about just "following".

Observing the natural world is how I grew up, and relates to the college degree I have and occupational work I perform for the past 34 years.

So why did you stop "observing" when it comes to AGW? You seem to have no idea what temperature anomalies are and you consistently misrepresent the fact that the scientists do track natural forcings.

So it is abundantly clear you don't even really know about the science you are critiquing here.

You should learn from nature, not just from men.

I haven't seen you do that on here yet. Luke 6:31, my good man.

When you look at nature and its systems of cooling, warming, physical display of conduction-convection-massive atmospheric and ocean currents-and the like, the additional ~150 ppm CO2 placed in the atmosphere by man has no noticeable effect on the earth TEMPERATURE. In particular CATASTROPHIC WARMING!!!

Except that it has been observed to do so.

 

[RealityCheck01]

The embodiment and works of the IPCC as the most clear example of the "Catastrophic Global Warming" scam!
...snipped more paranoia and ignorance...

I ignored the paranoia and ignorance about the IPCC in the OP the first time I looked at it but this has raised its ugly head again .

The main part of the report is "WG I: The Physical Science Basis". The delusion of thinking that hundreds of scientists conducting a review of the scientific literature about climate change are colluding to scam the world is obvious. Anyone could detect that "scam" just by looking at the original sources which are comprehensively cited in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (and previous reports). Only paranoids would think that all of the scientists writing the reports, all of the cited scientists and all of the scientists who read the report would not detect that imaginary scam.

 

[Loudmouth]

Natural variability still controls the earths climate and weather.

You need evidence for this claim.

You should learn from nature, not just from men. You should observe nature, learn by observing nature, and over time learn about weather and climate dynamics. Not headlines and men's words.

That is what we have done. We have studied the science and ignored the words of men like yourself.

In the post I quote you make empty assertions with no observations or science to back them up. They are just the words of men with nothing from nature to back them up.

 

[RealityCheck01]

.

Mixture, again.

.


Ignorance again Heissonear.
A couple of things that are not coherent debate:
* Personal anecdotes with no facts.
* Repeated statements of ignorance about climate, e.g. "Natural variability still controls the earths climate and weather".
It is the Sun that has always been the primary driver of the Earth's climate - no Sun and climate (and even weather) become very boring ! There are many other drivers of climate, e.g. oceanic oscillations, CO2, albedo (snow versus forest), aerosols, etc.

When are you going to stop denying the science and use the observations of the natural world that have been collected over centuries of climate science, Heissonear?
Berkeley Earth

The Berkeley Earth group concluded that the warming trend is real, that over the past 50 years (between the decades of the 1950s and 2000s) the land surface warmed by 0.91±0.05°C, and their results mirrors those obtained from earlier studies carried out by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Hadley Centre, NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) Surface Temperature Analysis, and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. The study also found that the urban heat island effect and poor station quality did not bias the results obtained from these earlier studies.[10][11][12][13]

A newsletter from the Berkeley Earth web site:
The Average Temperature of 2014 Results from Berkeley Earth (PDF)

Berkeley Earth has constructed an estimate of the global average temperature during 2014, including land and sea. The key findings are:

1. The global surface temperature average (land and sea) for 2014 was nominally the warmest since the global instrumental record began in 1850; however, within the margin of error, it is tied with 2005 and 2010 and so we can’t be certain it set a new record.
2. For the land, 2014 was nominally the 4th warmest year since 1753 (when the land surface temperature record began)
3. For the sea, 2014 was the warmest year on record since 1850
4. For the contiguous United States, 2014 ranked nominally as the 38th warmest year on record since 1850.

Rather than making up a fairy story about your local temperatures why don't you look up the actual data, Heissonear?
Start at Berkeley Earth City Selection
One click from there and my city of Wellington, New Zealand has a Regional warming since 1960 (°C / century) of 0.94 ± 0.27.

ETA: It is possible that you are incapable of looking up the data for yourself so
Warming since 1960 (°C / century)
United States = 2.36 ± 0.13
Texas = 2.15 ± 0.17
These stations near Lake Conroe (sound familiar, Heissonear ?) all show warming.
Temperature Monitoring Station: CONROE (active since 1897!)
Mean rate of change (°C / century) = 0.42

These two stations have only been in place since 1995 and 1997 and have much larger changes which illustrates why climate scientists use ~30 years to distinguish between climate and weather.
Temperature Monitoring Station: CONROE MONTGOMERY COUNTY AP (1997)
Mean rate of change (°C / century) = 6.96
Temperature Monitoring Station: CONROE TEXAS (1995)
Mean rate of change (°C / century) = 9.51

 

[RealityCheck01]

A bit of quite fascinating climate science: Why the Miocene Matters (and doesn’t) Today

Past climate changes are analogs, albeit imperfect ones, for our modern climate change. Despite the differences between such episodes and today, they tell us a great deal about how the Earth-atmosphere-ocean-ice-vegetation-climate system responds to perturbations of the carbon cycle. Global warming in the Miocene at 16.9 million years ago is a mild example.

 

[eclipsenow]

.

Mixture, again.

When are you going to stop following what men say and make intelligent observations of the natural world yourself?

Observing the natural world is how I grew up, and relates to the college degree I have and occupational work I perform for the past 34 years.

Natural variability still controls the earths climate and weather. You should learn from nature, not just from men. You should observe nature, learn by observing nature, and over time learn about weather and climate dynamics. Not headlines and men's words.

It should stay in focus that the recently created "Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming" statements and predictions should all be, well, the Catastrophic Warming of the entire earth by man. Not about misinformation and hype.

When you look at nature and its systems of cooling, warming, physical display of conduction-convection-massive atmospheric and ocean currents-and the like, the additional ~150 ppm CO2 placed in the atmosphere by man has no noticeable effect on the earth TEMPERATURE. In particular CATASTROPHIC WARMING!!!

It ain't happening. Put the propaganda down. Stop the hype like it is happening. Look around for yourself.

You mean that same nature that you're stubbornly refusing to see? Dude, the words of men don't make glaciers retreat up mountainsides or spring arrive early. But the CO2 of man does.

Fourier device + CO2 mathematics = observation of the natural world.

Oh, and then there's taking a stroll through nature while recording things in a notebook: scientifically and everything! Both the maths and the observations tell us that we're changing the climate which is impacting the 'dice' in the weather = more droughts and floods, more famine.

 

[Heissonear]

.

Look at the history and claims: in the two links below you have statements from climate experts stating opposites - the coming Ice Age causing the cooling verses Global Warming causing the cooling.

What a theatrical the current experts have staged. Even cold means it is due to warm: unfalsifiable Alarmism!


https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com...s-global-cooling-map-to-prove-global-warming/


Is global warming causing extreme weather via jet stream waves? | John Abraham | Environment | The Guardian

 

[Heissonear]

Yes, cold and snow now means proof of Global Warming.

Forum on climate change postponed due to snow

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/forum-on-climate-change-postponed-due-to-snow/

.

 

[eclipsenow]

Yes, cold and snow now means proof of Global Warming.

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/forum-on-climate-change-postponed-due-to-snow/

Yeah, cause an anonymous blog entitled 'tallbloke' at wordpress is a more credible source than NASA, etc! Seriously?

Here's the thing, dude. As a Christian, don't you care about people? Don't you care about saving lives, helping the poor, ending discrimination, social justice, and all that jazz? Don't you want to make the world a better place? Then even if you don't believe in it, there are plenty of reasons to JUMP ON BOARD the climate change bandwagon because (well, let's just be blunt) it really is TRUE according to the best science available (and not all the laughable junk you keep quoting). But also because the side effects of dealing with climate change will help the poor!

Let me explain.

Worldwide, W.H.O estimates that good old fashioned SMOG (particulate pollution from oil, gas, and coal) kills 3.7 million people each year. But wood-stoves across Asia and Africa kill more! Imagine how many lives affordable nuclear power could save if it replaced the wood stoves with electric cooking and cleared up Asia's skies? With this many people dying every year from a lack of clean electricity, the argument FOR nuclear power skyrockets. James Hansen estimates that nuclear power has prevented so much smog in America that existing nukes have already saved something like 1.5 million lives in America(!), and they have much *cleaner* coal filters than some coal stations across Asia. This is why coal kill more people every week when it goes right than the entire history of nuclear power going wrong. Claims that nuclear power is a 'death industry' just sounds like an echo of Helen Caldicott's banshee screeching!
"WHO estimated that there were about 4.3 million deaths in 2012 caused by indoor air pollution, mostly people cooking inside using wood and coal stoves in Asia. WHO said there were about 3.7 million deaths from outdoor air pollution in 2012, of which nearly 90% were in developing countries."
Air pollution 'kills 7 million people a year' | Environment | The Guardian

So if you want to help people and save about 7 to 8 million people a year from the pain and terror of choking to death, join us. Come on in, the water's fine. (And the science is credible). Otherwise you're defying the physics behind Fourier Devices, defying simply counting the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere before the Industrial Revolution and then now, and comparing the extra heat trapped, and defying everything we know about natural cycles NOT being the driving forces now, and defying the evidence of your own eyes: late winter, early spring, and glaciers and ice caps retreating. It's 4 Hiroshima bombs per second spread across the planet. It's got to have an effect.

LOOK with your EYES! (Not with your Denial gland!)

Here's a nice photo commented on by the USGS. As a geologist, you've got to respect their work don't you?

Oh, yeah, that comes from the so called 'Glacier Park'. You guys might have to rename it in 15 years!

Global Climate Change Background

Lisa McKeon compares early 1900 image of Iceberg Glacier with present photo location.

Glacier National Park’s namesake glaciers have receded rapidly since the Park’s establishment in 1910, primarily due to long-term changes in regional and global climate. In the last century, the five warmest years have occurred in the last 8 years - in this order: 2005, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2004 (NASA). These changes include warming, particularly of daily minimum temperatures, and persistent droughts. This warming is ongoing and the loss of the Park’s glaciers continues, with the park’s glaciers predicted to disappear by 2030.

USGS Repeat Photography Project Documents Retreating Glaciers in Glacier National Park | Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center (NOROCK)